Reviews

This is a fun Horror movie. It's not a comedy, as some would have you think. It has some black humor, but doesn't go overboard like "Evil Dead" it has more of an unintended comedy vibe. The funny thing is to see accomplished blockbuster names like Chris Hemsworth in a horror flick after he has starred in Big Budget movies. It's usually the other way around. It's still charming to him play the same Thor character just with short hair. That's the comedy of the film.

Others would say the whole "Big Brother" live audience vibe also feels clichéd. I hate that word just as much as "Torture Porn" Horror movies have rules about the roles each youngster should play and this film follows them well. Enough said.

I did want to compare this one to 13 Ghosts, not because it was bad, but because we get cameos from every Horror icon from the past 30 years and even some new ones. Not the actual faces, but very close. The way they are presented really had me hoping Mathew Lillard would reprise his 13 Ghosts role. Those who see the movie will understand my comment. I mean , how in Hades did anyone manage to cage them up like that? I would have enjoyed this film even more if the "Black Zodiac" persona's were integrated into the story line.

To break it down. First half of movie is a cool Zombie/slasher flick set in a cabin, second half invites the Action element and payback is a bitch into full gear. The enjoyment factor is high. I recommend it if you like a little variety into your horror movies and are able to keep the comedy effect to a low. Much more enjoyable if you keep your head straight and see it a a Action/Horror with unintended humor.

Again I say that "Black Zodiac" should have been in this movie. Would have been a nice mix with the whole ending scenario. The ending was the weakest link for me. I think Mrs. Weaver was miscast. She can do a great villain(Wicked witch in a snow white) remake, but not on this film. I think the Wicked Witch actually makes a cameo appearance in there as well.

There is a lot of CGI , but it's most definitely needed in a film like this and really only introdiced in the second Action/Horror half. The kills are gruesome enough, but CGI, so be warned if you dislikes these effects. I'm not crazy about it myself, but I saw no other way of making the chaotic action scenes come to life.

The acting was good. Chris Hemsworth is very entertaining reprising his Thor role as a teenager. He goes a bit over the top, but I expect this from an already accomplished actor. The "stoner" character Fran Krantz, is hilarious. He is stoned throughout the film yet completely aware something in that cabin isn't right? I didn't care too much for the female characters. The "Slutty" role wasn't hot enough and her encounter with a wolf head comes out as more disturbing then sexy. The other female lead; Kristen Connely was a bit chaotic. Not really good nor bad. Her character isn't even really a virgin and it seemed like she phoned in her performance. The "Brain child", That's the title he is given in the movie seems like just another pretty boy filler. Think Peter Barton in Friday the 13th. He is just there for body count purpose and aside from one act of chivarly doesn't get too developed at all, before he finally "bites" it.

Final grade. I gave it an eight. It stays loyal to Horror movie rules and adds a bit of action fun into the mix. I would have loved to see more Big names in Body count roles like in Scream movies. That's always fun to watch.

My summary title has nothing to do about how I feel about the movie. I actually enjoyed it. The premise is as follows.(cut and paste)In Rutland Country, the six year-old Benjamin Michael Landry is kidnapped by a psychopath in the lawn of his house. His father Craig Landry unsuccessfully runs after the truck but the abductor escapes. Sooner the police discovers that John Kozlowski had abducted and killed Benjamin. When the criminal is sentenced to 25 years in prison only, Benjamin's mother Elise Landry presses her husband to kidnap John and torture him. Craig is a doctor and knows exactly how to inflict pain to the psychopath. They succeed to kidnap John from the prison transport, but Craig has an accident and John is hurt. The couple tortures the man until they find the truth about their victim.

I actually enjoyed this film; as I viewed it entirely from the parents point of view. I have no sentiments for murdered and Bill Mosley plays one of his most diabolical and sinister yet. I would have loved to have see more of his performance, but I guess it would break away from the actual plot. I was thinking if he played one of the parents doing the torturing, but that would probably make the parent look to maniac-ish.

I didn't find many flaws. Both Jessie Metcalfe and Erika Christensen play solid roles as a young couple who have been tortured by the premature murder of their only child. One flaw I did find was how brainless the jury could have been to only give Bill Mosley's character 20 to life. Excuse me? Didn't the prosecutors present pictures in this case or did the defendant's lawyer go the "They entered his house without a warrant" plea. Either way, it shows how "Broken" the judicial system really is.

I have both love and hate for the story's ending as well. I love the twist, but I feel the last scene itself was weak as ever. I wanted to know what happened when the couple went home and turned on the news. What went on through their heads knowing that 20 to life isn't that long and someday.... To me the ending was inconclusive and could have been much better.

I give it a seven, because I love all kinds of horror and suspense...and would someone please torture those who still use the term "Torture Porn". That's a nasty word dreamed up by haters of the horror genre and should never be used by an actual fan.

I always review my movies after the first time watch, because that's when they make the first honest impression on me. Usually after that they get better as I pick up on more plot lines and clues. I give this movie an eight, because it's original. Aside form the 1990's "Scarecrows" ;which . by the way ,I thought was excellent; there hasn't been a whole lot of good SCare Crow themed movies. Scare Crow 1 and 2 are totally done for fun. Tony Todd and Tiffany Shepis Star, but the Scarecrow flips and talks like Freddy Krueger, so I can't take them too seriously. This movie , however , again puts my faith in the comeback of the old school horror formula.

First off; let me explain, that were I live this film was promoted as being Jeepers Creepers 3. It has the title "El Demonio 3" which is what jeepers Creepers titles are given over here. Even on the menu page; the title "Demonio 3" appears, so I thought, what have I got to lose. Upon seeing the scarecrow on the cover I was septic as to it actually being a continuation of the "Jeepers Creepers" series, but it still looked interesting and I knew it had to be better than "Scare Crow" The setting of the movie; which is a farm house, actually had me thinking that this could indeed be Jeepers Creepers 3. In fact; I was compelled to believe this until the first flash backs start. Not willing to give off too many spoilers, but there is even a scene were the scare crow sniffs one of the victims and lets him live.

What I like about the movie is that it's quite original. Don't let those reviewers with grudges Against the directors and filmmakers steer you away with words like clichés and bad acting. Not true. In fact, early on, one of the most played out Rules of the horror genre concerning female actors is broken, so this one is full of surprises.

You do get cool deja vous feeling of movies from directors like Tobe Hooper and Wes Craven, and that all just lets you know you are in familiar territory and not with a bunch of amateurs who do not know about making horror films.

As for the movie itself ;funny enough, starts off with the same car wreck scene as the movie I just yesterday. "Wrong Turn 5" That there blew my mind just a bit, but thinking about it; it's always the best way to get your would be victims to get out and look for help and that's were the fun begins. Actually one of there friends is already missing by the time the other wake up from the car wreck. That there already becomes a mystery to the rest of them as well as the viewer. What follows next is pure unpredictability. The viewer thinks this will happen but instead happens another way.

I'd like to write more about the film, but I don't wanna spoil the fun. I will say that it's not Jeepers Creepers 3. It's not a slasher film either. Nor a ghost story. It's a little bit of all three and very enjoyable. the actors all play different roles with really different personalities and agenda for their actions. That last line I just wrote has a lot more to do with the movie than just their acting abilities and what makes up the interesting and original plot line.

My one small beef is that the gore factor is pretty low, but I really didn't even notice this until the end of the film, so it really shines in other factors. particulalry the story; which I really enjoyed and honestly can say; have not seen it in any Horror movie yet... and I have many in my collection.

My recommendation is; if you haven't already seen it, to view it this Halloween. Nothing like a good Scare Crow movie to get you in the mood for the ghouls and ghosts who will be visiting you all night.

before I get started; be warned that I might let out a spoiler or two in trying to get my point across. This is not my intention at all. Now for my review

I gotta say that those giving this film a low rating are probably not horror fans at all. They always bitch about the same things. bad acting, bad setting, blah blah blah. So tired of reading the same thing without it actually letting me know anything about the movie itself. Some fan even complained about one of the attractive actresses not showing any skin during what was set up to be a shower scene. I'm kinda actually glad the movie decided to take a different turn then the played out been there done that shower scene. The film is anything but predictable and it actually sets up the plot when our heroes take an actual wrong turn. This is were the fun starts.

The plot is great. "A small West Virginia town is hosting the legendary Mountain Man Festival on Halloween, where throngs of costumed party goers gather for a wild night of music and mischief. But an inbred family of hillbilly cannibals kill the fun when they trick and treat themselves to a group of visiting college students." Now while the rest of the town are celebrating this festival, our remaining residents; which happen to be out would be heroes are left helpless and stranded in a town where the deformed hillbillies cut the power. This is due to the fact that they are gonna try to break out their father figure, Maynard(Doug Bradley) who plays a great, maniacal father figure of some sort. at the same time; they are gonna get their revenge on the ones responsible for getting him locked up.

I've been following the series since part 1. I admit that first two are and always will be the best. Mostly in part because of the actors who have starred in other horror and gore films. Crystal Lowe, Jeremy Sisto etc... Part three was bad, but 4 & now ; especially 5 seems to be breathing life back into the franchise. This is where O Brian decides to have fun with his storyline.

As for the gore itself; which is the most important factor in slasher movies, I think they do a pretty damn good job keeping the kills at an interesting level. I; myself am pure old school and I gotta thank Declan O'Brian for totally staying away from CGI; which to me is an abomination to horror and gore. I say keep it with the prosthetics and take it back to the amateurish look of the early 70s and 80s...and that's exactly what this movie does. O'Brian; himself, states that in the DVD film extras. That he wanted to keep it "old school" and I totally got it. From the chopped off finger to the entrails feeding scene I saw some pretty cool Tom Savini school of FX tricks in there. Furthermore; O'Brian opted for using real animal guts and pieces of meet to give it a more realistic scene. One can totally appreciate this in the " giant lawnmower" scene.

My one "beef"; would be that the deformed Hillbillies; themselves were not particularly menacing.The masks, looked more like something from a thrift store than actual make up. I'm assuming O' Brian is trying to get across the fact that they are still rather young. It's a known fact; that are not so perfect facial feature become more pronounced with age. Taking this into consideration; They look to be around early 20s. Could be college students as well. remember in Part 5 they were just budding teens. The makeup also looked rather odd and not particularly menacing neither. The make up looked best in part 1; which the part were most of them were killed off. This is also the part where they appear to be full grown men. So after careful consideration the toned down make up is actually quite fitting for the storyline. On one last note and I had to add this to see if anyone notices it? The mask of the "Laughing" hillbilly; you know the skinny one with the witch like face, kinda resembles the mask used in "Curtains" I'm not gonna go into details, but if you've seen the movies; which any real horror buff fan has, then just recall the ice skating scene. Creep stuff.

With this latest entry in the series; I can barely wait for part 6.Part two was a whole other family. I'm still waiting to the storyline behind their existence. What I'm guessing is that part 5 partly picks off were part 4 left off. Part 6 will probably explain how they came to be under Douge Bradley's care, so I'm pretty sure will see him again as well as the last surviving victim. I love horror movies that set up the next entry in the final scene.

I do recommend this part 5 if you are an "Old School" horror fan and If you opt for prosthetics instead of CGI. The old Tom Savini style from "Maniac" and "Prowler". Especially if you like to analyze movies and try to guess the next moves and You will really dig the kills.

I have always been a big fan of the mythology movies. I grew up with Jason & The Argonauts and all the Sinbad entries with. Here is where I compare this latest Clash Entries with those movies. One one the particularly comes to mind is Sinbad & The Eye Of The Tiger. I get a strange sensation that Wrath.. got half of it's idea from the movie. Especially with it's monsters. Granted they were presented ion different fashion ,but basically the same ones. "Wrath" features the Cyclops on Chaos Island. "Eye Of The Tiger" features on Troglodytes; who resemble Cyclops in every way, except the one- eye feature, but one also decides to journey with Sinad and his crew to the Magic temple of sorts. here Our hero, Sinbad, encounters a towering golden mechanical Minataur called;aptly, Minoton. This is much like the Minotaur monster Persius encounters in the labyrinth. That in fact is actually part of the Thesus mythology tale; not Persius. Anway I see a lot of resemblances to that particular Sinbad entry throughout the Wrath sequel. Another movie , which I think inspires some ideas for Wrath is the 2011 firm "Inmortals". Not a particularly great film, but the comic resemblances are very obvious. Take for instance Micky Rourk's; King Hyperion character. Now try to follow me here. Micky Rourk starred in the Keira Knightly film; "Domino" and now he has a pert in a mythology film and he plays the villain. Another actor from "Domino" is Edgar Ramirez, who now plays Ares in the new Wrath film. Coincedene? Furthermore the plot of "Inmortals" actually revolves around the real story of Thesus and the Minotaur. I don't ,but when I pinpoint little things like these ; it just makes "Wrath" all the more silly. BTW, you also have fallen GODs in WRath, just like Inmortals. Asiad from one episode of Xena Warriour princess; I have never seen GODS die; now it seems they are falling like flies in every movie.

My final comparison of "Wrath" to "Inmortals" would be the scene in "Inmortals" where Zeus slays Ares for defying his command. It's almost as if Ares comes back to life in "Wrath" and takes his revenge in Zeus for killing him off in "Inmortals". Add to the fact that It's also an all out war between GODS and Titans in "Inmortals" and you basically have the same premise for "Wrath" except with a much juicer budget.

I like "Wrath", but feel a bit ripped of story wise after having watched "Inmortals"

Just a few things I did enjoy were the monsters. CGI or not , they were pretty fierce looking. I only wish they had milked the Minotaur-Persues fight a bit longer. I've yet to see a really spectacular fight scene with a demi-GOD and Minotaur.

As far as acting goes; the actors did a great job. The GODs; Neeson,Fiennes, and Nighy all had the right feel for their parts, but the mortals left much to be desired. . I still think Worthington isn't worthy of the Persius role and Rosamund Pike was really out of place. The rest were just extras: Even Kebell; who plays Posidon's long lost son, is misplayed, because his importance just fizzles out halfway through the film.

Anyway, I would recommend the movie to die hard mythology buffs to come up with their own conclusions. A one time watch wouldn't hurt, but somehow, all these CGI effects don't come up against the older stop motion techniques. Not without a good strong storyline and these new entries fail miserably in the story lines.

7 stars for action and cgi monsters, but only 3 stars for the way the story is executed.